The movie was named A Civil Action and was directed by Steven Zaillian and released in 1998.
2.What is the central argument or narrative of the film?
The main argument of the film discusses the issue with major corporations causing environmental problems by not following the laws that bind them. Governments support these large companies due to the fact that they are very power and have large sums of money. In this movie, the community is faced with a slew of health problems such as leukemia and cancer due to the contaminants dumped by two large corporations in their drinking water. We need to unite as a community and stand up against these companies no matter how low the odds are in order to do what’s right.
3.What sustainability problems does the film draw out?
There are a few sustainability issues that are brought up in this Hollywood movie. First would be the environmental problems that are caused by a company such as the contamination of the groundwater supply. This lead to a series of other problems such as health issues that the resident’s received after exposure to the drinking water. The plaintiffs sued in order to receive compensation and the cleanup of the contaminated areas. However, there were several legal issues that faced the small community. The case was dismissed the first time around due to the influence the corporations had in the area. These tanning companies were very powerful and had large sums of money which were used to try to settle the cases. This is a major problem with small organizations against large companies. The small organizations just do not have the money.
4.What parts of the film did you find most persuasive and compelling? Why?
I think the most interesting part of the movie was when the EPA came and took the case over as a class action suit against the corporations and won by legally forcing them to clean up the contamination. I always wonder if the EPA will become as active and powerful in real life as they were represented in this movie.
5.What parts of the film were you not compelled or convinced by?
What didn’t really compel me about this movie was the fact that I don’t believe that this was a great representation of the United States court system. I think they went too far into the drama and lost sight of the underlying environmental and corporate issues that made it a great story. I wish it wasn’t so Hollywood.
6.What additional information does this film compel you to seek out? Where do you want to dig deeper and what connections do you want to make with other issues, factors, problems, etc.?
This movie really interested me into researching the American court system concerning environmental cases against corporate giants such as the court decisions in Michigan concerning Nestle. If we know and understand certain trends and finding effective means, we may be able to beat the corporations more efficiently. Overall, this would benefit our environmental systems.
7.What audiences does the film best address? What kind of imagination is fostered in viewers? Do you think the film is likely to change the way viewers think about and act on environmental problems?
This movie is meant for high school students and up. I wouldn’t suggest watching it as an environmental film, as there are a great amount of documentaries that are more effective and thorough than this movie. They would be able to reach the emotions and affect the opinions of the viewers better. This movie had great underlying and important themes that are significant sustainability problems in our world today. I think this film will make the viewer think about some environmental issues, but not effective enough that will cause substantial change.
8.What kinds of action or points of intervention are suggested by the film?
Legal action was the main intervention against corporations that the film suggests. In reality, this is very hard to achieve, which was well represented by the film. Government action was another point that was made by the movie. There are many parts of the equation in order for these to go in order to be beneficial to the environment.
9.What could have been added to this film to enhance its environmental educational value?
The film provided decent imagery on the environmental effects that the companies caused the citizens of the town. They mostly focused on the physical health of the community more than the environment. Possibly by showing more images of the environmental harms would provide a more educational background for the viewer.
A Civil Action
1. Title, director and release year?
The movie was named A Civil Action and was directed by Steven Zaillian and released in 1998.
2. What is the central argument or narrative of the film?
The main argument of the film discusses the issue with major corporations causing environmental problems by not following the laws that bind them. Governments support these large companies due to the fact that they are very power and have large sums of money. In this movie, the community is faced with a slew of health problems such as leukemia and cancer due to the contaminants dumped by two large corporations in their drinking water. We need to unite as a community and stand up against these companies no matter how low the odds are in order to do what’s right.
3. What sustainability problems does the film draw out?
There are a few sustainability issues that are brought up in this Hollywood movie. First would be the environmental problems that are caused by a company such as the contamination of the groundwater supply. This lead to a series of other problems such as health issues that the resident’s received after exposure to the drinking water. The plaintiffs sued in order to receive compensation and the cleanup of the contaminated areas. However, there were several legal issues that faced the small community. The case was dismissed the first time around due to the influence the corporations had in the area. These tanning companies were very powerful and had large sums of money which were used to try to settle the cases. This is a major problem with small organizations against large companies. The small organizations just do not have the money.
4. What parts of the film did you find most persuasive and compelling? Why?
I think the most interesting part of the movie was when the EPA came and took the case over as a class action suit against the corporations and won by legally forcing them to clean up the contamination. I always wonder if the EPA will become as active and powerful in real life as they were represented in this movie.
5. What parts of the film were you not compelled or convinced by?
What didn’t really compel me about this movie was the fact that I don’t believe that this was a great representation of the United States court system. I think they went too far into the drama and lost sight of the underlying environmental and corporate issues that made it a great story. I wish it wasn’t so Hollywood.
6. What additional information does this film compel you to seek out? Where do you want to dig deeper and what connections do you want to make with other issues, factors, problems, etc.?
This movie really interested me into researching the American court system concerning environmental cases against corporate giants such as the court decisions in Michigan concerning Nestle. If we know and understand certain trends and finding effective means, we may be able to beat the corporations more efficiently. Overall, this would benefit our environmental systems.
7. What audiences does the film best address? What kind of imagination is fostered in viewers? Do you think the film is likely to change the way viewers think about and act on environmental problems?
This movie is meant for high school students and up. I wouldn’t suggest watching it as an environmental film, as there are a great amount of documentaries that are more effective and thorough than this movie. They would be able to reach the emotions and affect the opinions of the viewers better. This movie had great underlying and important themes that are significant sustainability problems in our world today. I think this film will make the viewer think about some environmental issues, but not effective enough that will cause substantial change.
8. What kinds of action or points of intervention are suggested by the film?
Legal action was the main intervention against corporations that the film suggests. In reality, this is very hard to achieve, which was well represented by the film. Government action was another point that was made by the movie. There are many parts of the equation in order for these to go in order to be beneficial to the environment.
9. What could have been added to this film to enhance its environmental educational value?
The film provided decent imagery on the environmental effects that the companies caused the citizens of the town. They mostly focused on the physical health of the community more than the environment. Possibly by showing more images of the environmental harms would provide a more educational background for the viewer.